Double head milling

[Rob D]

Not yet rob, still working my way through the 3x. 325 chain I got. End up doing most milling in 36" 404 chain with the 084.

 

Will def look into it next time I'm needing a chain.

 

How does it compare to 404? I remember you saying you thought the 404 would be much faster than 325?

 

Sent from my C6603 using Arbtalk mobile app

 

 

 

 

The Stihl PMX is very fast and clean cutting indeed.

 

 

Ref .404 vs .325 I would say the .404 is 'a bit' quicker but not hugely faster. It should hold it's edge better. But then I expect the planks surface would end up being a bit rougher - so a bit of 6 of one and half a dozen of the other!

[Big J]

Jon I don't want to disagree with everything you just said... but I disagree with most of it!

 

 

Double ended milling is fine with x2 different powerheads - I've used it multiple times successfully. You can manage the flex in the bar and still get large flat planks.

 

 

Have you actually tried milling with x2 different powerheads?

 

 

Yes there is more strain on components and lesser margin for errors than a single set up - but in the right hands - it works! And works well.

 

 

 

 

 

I haven't tried with two different power heads, but I feel that it would be a recipe for premature wear on both machines. With two different power outputs, two different maximum RPMs and two different chain speeds, it's going to stress both machines excessively. Just my opinion.

 

I found that on bars over 50" bar flex was an ever present issue. The clamps on the chainsaw mill itself simply aren't powerful enough to hold the bar firmly. You might get one or two good cuts but then you have to slack the clamps off and reset. There's no guarantee it won't all go tits up mid cut either. When the bar bends, it quickly wears the chain, stressing the drive links and resulting in snapped chains. The premature wear on the chain wears the drive sprocket quickly too. And all the extra effort of pushing a bar that won't stay flat through the wood doesn't do the powerhead any good.

 

I really go reckon that 50" is the best compromise length for chainsaw milling. You can use two powerheads and it's very quick. The bar won't bend and you still end up with 42" wide boards. Any logs large than that you can just mill a few boards off and then roll the log with a forklift or winch.

 

Either way, it's all much easier with a bandmill!

[billpierce]

The Stihl PMX is very fast and clean cutting indeed.

 

 

Ref .404 vs .325 I would say the .404 is 'a bit' quicker but not hugely faster. It should hold it's edge better. But then I expect the planks surface would end up being a bit rougher - so a bit of 6 of one and half a dozen of the other!

Sorry rob I mean how does the 404 compare to stihl pmx?

 

Sent from my C6603 using Arbtalk mobile app

[Rob D]

I haven't tried with two different power heads, but I feel that it would be a recipe for premature wear on both machines. With two different power outputs, two different maximum RPMs and two different chain speeds, it's going to stress both machines excessively. Just my opinion.

 

I found that on bars over 50" bar flex was an ever present issue. The clamps on the chainsaw mill itself simply aren't powerful enough to hold the bar firmly. You might get one or two good cuts but then you have to slack the clamps off and reset. There's no guarantee it won't all go tits up mid cut either. When the bar bends, it quickly wears the chain, stressing the drive links and resulting in snapped chains. The premature wear on the chain wears the drive sprocket quickly too. And all the extra effort of pushing a bar that won't stay flat through the wood doesn't do the powerhead any good.

 

I really go reckon that 50" is the best compromise length for chainsaw milling. You can use two powerheads and it's very quick. The bar won't bend and you still end up with 42" wide boards. Any logs large than that you can just mill a few boards off and then roll the log with a forklift or winch.

 

Either way, it's all much easier with a bandmill!

 

 

Haha!

 

 

But honestly the proof is there in the vid - we did x20 planks. We re set using the first cut rails on the 3rd plank.

 

The planks all came out pancake flat and even.

 

Cutting was smooth and easy.

 

Both powerheads are working to push that chain round the bar - as soon as any saw cuts wood it is never working at max rpm - same in this scenario.

 

Ok - yes you could easily knacker the powerheads by over revving etc. but as long as you know what's what the system works really well.

 

That tree would have been a slog with a single powerhead style set up but it felt pretty easy cutting with the double set up.

[Rob D]

Sorry rob I mean how does the 404 compare to stihl pmx?

 

Sent from my C6603 using Arbtalk mobile app

 

 

It's better - but really this is dicey territory - it's better but error margins become much smaller as generally speaking .404 is 120cc territory and you're not supposed to use that small a chain on that big a saw.

 

3/8 lo pro chain is fine to sub in for 3/8 standard but to change it on a big saw running .404 - not sure.

[ucoulddoit]

Don't know anything about this type of setup, but intuitively, I suppose the more powerful saw should be the one doing most of the work, i.e. it should be pulling the chain through the wood to cut it, whereas the smaller saw is pulling the chain through the previously cut kerf?

 

Andrew

[Big J]

Haha!

 

 

But honestly the proof is there in the vid - we did x20 planks. We re set using the first cut rails on the 3rd plank.

 

The planks all came out pancake flat and even.

 

Cutting was smooth and easy.

 

Both powerheads are working to push that chain round the bar - as soon as any saw cuts wood it is never working at max rpm - same in this scenario.

 

Ok - yes you could easily knacker the powerheads by over revving etc. but as long as you know what's what the system works really well.

 

That tree would have been a slog with a single powerhead style set up but it felt pretty easy cutting with the double set up.

 

Well fair enough. It's just brutally hard work and having done more chainsaw milling than most, if I ever have to use one again, it will be about 1000 years too soon. It's not to say that they don't have their place, but I did my time and I'm now free!

[Rob D]

Well fair enough. It's just brutally hard work and having done more chainsaw milling than most, if I ever have to use one again, it will be about 1000 years too soon. It's not to say that they don't have their place, but I did my time and I'm now free!

 

 

Weird Jon - that never comes across in your posts at all

 

 

But - you never used the winch kit I think?

I almost stopped chainsaw milling until this little beauty arrived and it takes 80% of the work out of it and (other than the fumes) makes chainsaw milling almost a pleasure!

 

And we are making in roads into making chainsaw milling even easier for the future - yes sir!

 

 

[Big J]

Weird Jon - that never comes across in your posts at all

 

 

But - you never used the winch kit I think?

I almost stopped chainsaw milling until this little beauty arrived and it takes 80% of the work out of it and (other than the fumes) makes chainsaw milling almost a pleasure!

 

And we are making in roads into making chainsaw milling even easier for the future - yes sir!

 

 

 

I don't often deal with the kind of trees that warrant them now. Used to do back garden elms, and inaccessible trees in woodlands and the chainsaw mill was awesome for that. However, everything just comes to the yard now and with a throat of 46 inches on the band mill, if it won't fit through that, I won't bother with it. Also, the sawdust issue bothers me. I tend to try to sell as cheaply as possible, and on a 4ft diameter log cut to 2", you lose 3 complete boards to sawdust (which if it were something like elm, would cost you about £225 on a 10ft length, assuming £15 a cube green value).

 

Anyway, I'm not wanting to denigrate the merits of chainsaw milling. It's a useful tool to have in the armoury and for someone starting out milling, it's ideal. It's just not a sustainable solution long term due to the wastefulness, cost (2 stroke fuel and oil cost a sodding fortune - the bandmill uses about 50 pence of diesel per tonne of timber processed) and physical strain on the operator.

 

I didn't try the winch system. I was more or less finished with it by the time you released it. I'm curious to see what else you guys come up with in the future to make the system easier to use.

[peckerwood2016]

I use the winch system which makes cutting a lot easier to do and just got a woodlandsmill hm130 for smaller stuff

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk